There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
Debate talk:Falsifiability
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This debate necessitates a {{tl;dr}} template. — Unsigned, by: Neveruse513 / talk / contribs 13:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- Can someone with the appropriate skills archive the first 5 or 6 sections of this discussion? Jorge Member of Vandal/Parodist Website 18:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- {{tl;dr}} seems not to exist here. Should I check WP (ain't there either)? Oh, and Jorge, archiving makes it harder to follow. It's a debate, after all, and needs to be followed from the beginning, as brain-numbing as that might be. ħuman
04:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- I already archived it. Should the archived sections be put back in?
ListenerXTalkerX 04:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. Is anybody having trouble downloading it? It's easy to keep up by just reading the later edits. I suspect it should be resurrected, but that's just my opinion. ħuman
04:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. Is anybody having trouble downloading it? It's easy to keep up by just reading the later edits. I suspect it should be resurrected, but that's just my opinion. ħuman
- I already archived it. Should the archived sections be put back in?
- {{tl;dr}} seems not to exist here. Should I check WP (ain't there either)? Oh, and Jorge, archiving makes it harder to follow. It's a debate, after all, and needs to be followed from the beginning, as brain-numbing as that might be. ħuman